Music as art

Again & again, I use the label "art music" casually,
whether as juxtaposed with "popular music" or so as to
place a remark more firmly in perspective. However, such usage
omits an answer to the most basic question: What is art
music? Well, maybe it begs that question and maybe it does not,
as I will first offer the postmodern
idea that art music is the music under discussion by people using
the term art music. In that sense, we do know what we mean, at
least most of the time. The idea can easily start to break down
when discussing non-Western traditions,
and in many ways the idea of "music as art" is a peculiar
one. It implies a distance between oneself and the music under
discussion, a detached indifference as opposed to a practical
involvement. My own intention with the term has not been to make
such an implication, although I have been aware of it, but to
attempt to circumscribe the orientation of one tradition with
respect to another. It is, of course, a fact that writing these
discussions is indeed a detached indifference rather than a practical
involvement. This is not music-making, this is talking about music,
with only some hope that the feedback
can be worthwhile.

The label "art music" indicates, as much as anything,
that the present sort of auxiliary discussion exists. Although
the label itself is essentially a postmodern one, especially when
one considers that much of the discussion is about other discussion,
the existence of various speculative or theoretical writings
has a long history in Western music. This is a primary rationale
for considering much of the surviving medieval music as contiguous
with an art music tradition, rather than as a folk music. However,
the latter is a statement one does continue to see, stated without
support; rather, it is one of those bald assertions which saturates
many people's impressions of the music for no reason other than
that it pleases them to believe it.
Of course the label "art music" has only come into frequent
use because of the rise of popular music, and basically the resulting
marginalization of art music. In an
earlier article on the subject, I discussed both my personal
reaction to popular music as well as something of the effect the
phenomenon may have had on art music. I want to reaffirm the
conjecture at the end, namely that the increasing divergence of
classical styles today is driven at least partly by the dominance
of a more monolithic popular music. The power relationships, such
as they are, have been entirely rearranged. This is not to suggest
that popular music is now in command of "modern classical
music" as was the case in reverse prior to our century, and
especially prior to the existence of mass
electronic media, but that the two
share an uneasy equality. Popular music certainly earns more money,
the basis of power in today's society,
but it also depends on art music for much of its underpinning.
The latter retains some prestige of its own, even among people who
may never listen to it.

It is certainly true that popular music, at least in the
"megahits" which top the charts, is sometimes devoid of
originality, getting its harmonic
forms from classical music or even other pieces of popular music.
Indeed, popular culture has taken on such a life since the advent
of television that popular music has its own
traditions and separate continuity.
The tradition of alienating one's elders, as circumscribed earlier,
is only one of them, albeit the one with the fastest churn (i.e.
easy money). While popular music rarely strays far from the song
form, art music is the arena in which new or
abstract genres are aggressively
pursued. It has even become difficult to write "art songs"
today, clearly a relatively recent development in deference to
popular music, some of whose songs are becoming classics in their
own right. Jazz as a genre is essentially falling apart on this
distinction, as I see it, with some facets moving fully into
"popular music" and much of it becoming more closely
connected to art music. The latter has been especially true as
Europeans have become involved and as connections with other world
traditions are explored. Art music has also incorporated improvisation
in increasingly sophisticated ways, although it should be noted
that improvisation was always an important
aspect of a classical performer's training, if one less often
presented in public. The idea of "classical" music as
non-improvisatory, especially in America the home of jazz, has
combined with confusion produced by the specific musical era
designated by the term to downplay the significance of that label
in favor of the broader "art music." This is a label,
however, which is rarely understood outside of the group of people
who use it, and so one is left with the also-misunderstood &
convoluted "contemporary classical music" label all too
often in general discussion.

While we can go on to use "art music" as a more general
label to designate the complex of historical & cultural influences
which can impinge on contemporary
composition, the term continues to have a nonpractical implication.
It masks the activity of music-making, and dovetails far
too nicely into the passive consumerism of a
recording-based culture. One also
loses the religious background of
many of the historical developments, as the aesthetic position
subsumes other philosophical priorities. Indeed, aesthetics even
brings a primacy for the visual arts, a connection with at best a
tenuous history in medieval theory. Painting has taken a blow to
its practicality with the advent of photography, and so as an
abstract art has been left to grapple with issues similar to those
besetting music, helping to draw the two together under the aesthetic
label. The issue of relevance raises
itself here, and unfortunately the "art music" label can
serve to isolate practical music from its
purpose. The mere introduction of
aesthetic terminology brings philosophy into the picture, and there
is simply no way in which philosophy can be relevant aside from
the sense of a general web of connections. Correspondingly, it
requires an increasing amount of verbiage to describe both what
occurs in a piece of contemporary art music as well as the perspective
from which it can be understood. It is essentially this complicated
perspective, as mediated by scholarship, which defines art music
today. Yet, it is in many ways a postmodern
misdirection which obscures the practical impact of real
music-making, and is certainly a Western conceit, even if the term
is applicable to music elsewhere.